Posted by Rich:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

Alright guys,

Can we be done with this thread? While some good points were made and I think as the chief of state Bush is somewhat responsible for the poor rescue effort; this is really a rant thread by a bunch of leftists in NY(no suprise I guess) I mean we get all these articles posted by these fringe political socialists as proof that Bush is the root of all evil.(the last CNN one excepting) If one of these guys is criticized we have to have proof to the nth degree to not accept this information. If another analyst(i.e. O'Rielly) says something, anything can be used to completly discredit him(i.e the phone sex accusation) Even the last few posts are being substantiated on specualtion of the existence of possible hearsay. Even the title of the thread is kinda silly. If you remember, on Monday everyone was talking about how NO dodged the bullet and it wasn't that bad. The levies broke. That isn't Bush's fault in fact the levies have been designed to handle category 3 hurricanes only for decades. Then all the other ridculous ideas about having boats to pump water, Bush causing global warming, etc...It's kinda like Lincoln said if you really look fo the evil in folks of course you're gonna find it. Seriously, we should just have a Micheal Moore division of this website.

What a bunch of offensive nonsense.

You're a bunch of offensive nonesense.

That's a compliment from someone with your inability to reason.

On the contrary the reasoning is pretty sound. Can you dispute one thing he said in that post with facts?


Resign? Impeached? Are you guys for real?


[Edited by - gonygonygo on 09-14-2005 09:58 AM]

Posted by GoNyGoNyGo:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

Posted by Rich:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

Alright guys,

Can we be done with this thread? While some good points were made and I think as the chief of state Bush is somewhat responsible for the poor rescue effort; this is really a rant thread by a bunch of leftists in NY(no suprise I guess) I mean we get all these articles posted by these fringe political socialists as proof that Bush is the root of all evil.(the last CNN one excepting) If one of these guys is criticized we have to have proof to the nth degree to not accept this information. If another analyst(i.e. O'Rielly) says something, anything can be used to completly discredit him(i.e the phone sex accusation) Even the last few posts are being substantiated on specualtion of the existence of possible hearsay. Even the title of the thread is kinda silly. If you remember, on Monday everyone was talking about how NO dodged the bullet and it wasn't that bad. The levies broke. That isn't Bush's fault in fact the levies have been designed to handle category 3 hurricanes only for decades. Then all the other ridculous ideas about having boats to pump water, Bush causing global warming, etc...It's kinda like Lincoln said if you really look fo the evil in folks of course you're gonna find it. Seriously, we should just have a Micheal Moore division of this website.

What a bunch of offensive nonsense.

You're a bunch of offensive nonesense.

That's a compliment from someone with your inability to reason.

On the contrary the reasoning is pretty sound. Can you dispute one thing he said in that post with facts?


Resign? Impeached? Are you guys for real?


[Edited by - gonygonygo on 09-14-2005 09:58 AM]

Sure. Point by point:

1) Why should we be done with this thread? The issues are still timely and the facts of what transpired are still being adduced. For example, Knight Ridder reported today that Chertoff may bear more responsibility for the slow federal response than Brownie:

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/12637172.htm

As thousands of hurricane victims went without food, water and shelter in the days after Katrina's early morning Aug. 29 landfall, critics assailed Brown for being responsible for delays that might have cost hundreds of lives.

But Chertoff - not Brown - was in charge of managing the national response to a catastrophic disaster, according to the National Response Plan, the federal government's blueprint for how agencies will handle major natural disasters or terrorist incidents. An order issued by President Bush in 2003 also assigned that responsibility to the homeland security director.

But according to a memo obtained by Knight Ridder, Chertoff didn't shift that power to Brown until late afternoon or evening on Aug. 30, about 36 hours after Katrina hit Louisiana and Mississippi. That same memo suggests that Chertoff may have been confused about his lead role in disaster response and that of his department.

2. To argue that anyone who disagrees with him is a ranting lefty is absurdly uninformed and patently insulting.

Unlike Bush, I'm for balanced budgets. Who is the lefty?

Unlike Bush, I am only for starting wars when the country faces an imminent threat? Who is the lefty?

Labels mean nothing in today's political climate. To argue otherwise is to ignore facts. By definition, one who ignores facts necessarily reasons poorly.

3. Bush appointed Brown and Chertoff. Bush decided that FEMA and other domestic agencies should have their funding cut. Bush decided that FEMA should be folded into DHS. These have proven to be very costly decisions with regard to the federal government being able to respond appropriately to a domestic disaster, whether it be natural or man made.

Yet the poster accuses us of making Bush "the root of all evil." That claims flies in the face of the foregoing facts.

Accountability matters.

4. People on the inaptly named "right," incluing O'Reilly, had no problem with personal attacks on Bill Clinton, even to the point of impeaching him for a sex lie. Consequently, turnabout is fair play, and one shouldn't whine about it.

5. The claim of "hearsay" is specious. Hearsay is a term of art reserved for statements made by an absent declarant in a court of law where a defendant faces the potential loss of life, liberty, or property. Media reportage imposes no such risk on its subjects. They are merely fact finders. Consequently, it's fair to repeat anonymous quotes or informed speculation when the person making the quote is not using his or her anonymity to break the law.

6. To argue that Bush deserves blame for cutting programs that may have begun the process of ameliorating the levee problem, or to argue that he appointed political hacks to positions that required people who were emergency management professionals, or to argue that he wrongly merged DHS and FEMA, or to argue that he was slow to respond to the disaster, with factual evidence is entirely reasonable. To argue that Bush is being scapegoated without factually rebutting the foregoing facts is yet another example of poor reasoning.

7. The Micheal Moore smear may be the most offensive false claim he made. I can't stand Moore.

Everything I posted is factualy supported by major media outlets, not lefties.

Bush has a record of fiscal mismanagement; starting unnecessary, expensive, and poorly planned wars; appointing political hacks to key positions. As I have outlined above, these poor decisions have had serious consequences. The American people are paying the price.

Ad hominen attacks, like irrelevantly invoking the name of Moore, is as low a form or reasoning as one can employ.

Yet the poster accuses us of making Bush "the root of all evil." That claims flies in the face of the foregoing facts.